tv Face the Nation CBS December 18, 2017 2:00am-2:31am PST
>> dickerson: welcome back to "face the nation" for closer look at the republican tax bill and what it will mean for we turn to richard ruben he covers for "wall street journal." i've been reading everything that you've been writing. let's start just with the winners and losers at end of the day here. who are they? >> in the big picture the winners are corporations. you talked about before, corporate rate go from 35% to 21% that's real big win for kind of companies that have been paying close to that level. domestic retailers: pass-through businesses also win under this those are partnerships, s corporations, for a lot they will get 20% discount on their tax rate. they pay individual rates now, still will, but have big new deduction. then as secretary mnuchin talked about, middle los angeles household especially households with children will have tax cuts
see those in paychecks in february and tax return they file in april of 2019. those tax cuts are temporary they expire at the end of 2025 so that is something that i'm sure congress will fight over for the next eight years or so. >> dickerson: secretary also mentioned that 90% or able to fill their taxes out own card, one of the big goals, simplification. >> what he's talking about the income of people who would be able to move from itemizing to the standard deduction. right now about 70% of people take standard deduction this will push that up closer to 90% because standard deduction will be larger and fewer itemized deductions that cap on state and local income taxes, will limit that. this doesn't mean everyone filing on a postcard. simpler for those marginal itemizer like people who itemize now and won't under the new system, it will be simpler but some of those people in that group might actually end up paying more, it will be easier to keep track of your deductions
your ultimate tax bill might end up being higher. that is a trade off -- i don't know if that is a trade off you want to make. >> dickerson: and work that you have to do before you get it on the card. >> yeah, look, when you talk about a simpler system, this sim police fee really about what is a child that is eligible for tax credit, calculate earned tax credit for low income families that is still complicated. you can have simple form but behind that is a whole bunch of definitions and work sleets. >> dickerson: on corporate side and pass-through side there were lot of claims about things that were going to be removed from the code, is there sim police fee tee on those two parts of the story? >> the business side of the tax code complicated because the world is complicated, you have to figure out what -- how you should treat capital expenses. there some some simplicity there in the sense that we've got complicated depreciation schedules, at least for the first five years, companies can write off investments right away. that is a buck simplification getting rid of the corporate alternative minimum tax that is
simplification. but international divisions are new and novel and will take lot of tool time for companies to figure out. same with pass-through who is eligible for that break and who is not. there's going to be lot of work for tax accountants and lawyers in the days ahead. >> dickerson: what did you make of covering that process? give us your narrative story of how this went from original promise, is that were made about it until the final stage we're in here now? >> say think what we saw is a lot of those original promises, ones we saw during the campaign in 2016 and early part of 2017, a lot of them happened but lot of them -- some of them get jettisoned as they got toward reality of needing to pass. the failure on health care earlier in the year i don't underestimate how much that changed the republican mindset in congress. it went from we need to pass our ideal tax plan to need question to pass something. desire to get to the lawmakers was high. you had things like, repealing estate tax, repealing alternative minimum tax for
individuals. putting it in three tax brackets instead of seven, none of those things happened. they were making it revenue neutral not adding to the deficit which they talked about earlier in the year. they just pushed those things accede, we've got to get something done and this became the art of the possible not the art of the ideal. >> dickerson: at the end of the stage, marco rubio seemed to grab his moment, asked for child tax credit to be refundable for those people who don't pay income taxes. first of all, how much of a policy difference did his stance make, what's the difference between what it would have been and what it is now and then just what did you make of that last little piece of drama? >> so, what they did on policy, proposal in the senate was to allow the child tax credit for 17-year-old, right now capped for 16-year-old. so they kept the current law version of that. then expanded how much would be refundable for not the very lowest income families but lower, middle income families. you can think of what took billions of fundraising all 17-year-olds directing them to a
lot of lower middle income households. you can judge merits however want. the they were struggling with how to do this, didn't seem like they wanted to take o down the entire bill, they had the leverage to do that, but at the last moment they were able to get more. republican leaders did not want this in the bill initially they didn't put it in the house bill or the senate bill. and so that was a change that they were able to get at the end as part of getting everybody on board. >> dickerson: and another person was senator corker, of tennessee, who voted against the bill because of the affect on the deficit and debt. why did he change at the end? >> you know, he basically -- his statement said, i looked at it again i talked to people, i heard from constituents and realized that it's worth the risk. which is sums up what we were talking about. the republicans got to a point, even republican who said he was opposed to it now voting for it
because they are just really eager have some sort of accomplishment, something they can point to going into 2018 and mid-term elections, even though this bill sun popular with the public. >> dickerson: final question on the lobbyist of secretary of treasure resaid defeat for the lobbyists, how did you see their role in this and whether -- there are over 6,000 they got varied interests. since it was such a central and important part of the campaign getting special interests out of the process how do you owe sewell wait that here? >> there's some special interests who lost, home builders and realtors really fought to against -- around charities fought against that bigger standard deduction because it makes incentive to itemize smaller. they're not happy with the end product. those lobbyists aren't happy. corporate lobbyists who have been pushing for a much lower corporate tax rate for many years for territorial system on foreign income that make it easier nor u.s. companies to
earn profits above and bring them home. they are happy this is what they have been pushing for for a long time they had the magic line up of republicans controlling congress and white house to get it done. >> dickerson: richard rubin thanks for being with us, we'll be right back with our political panel. and an ice plant. but we brought power to the people- redefining what that meant from one era to the next. over 90 years later, we continue to build as america's 3rd largest investor in infrastructure. we don't just help power the american dream... we're part of it. jack and jill went up the hill to fetch a pail of water. all because of a burst water pipe in their house that ruined the hardwood floors in their kitchen. luckily the geico insurance agency had helped them with homeowners insurance and the inside of their house was repaired and floors replaced.
jack and jill no longer have to fetch water. they now fetch sugar-free vanilla lattes with almond milk. call geico and see how affordable homeowners insurance can be. what's going on? oh hey! call geico ♪ that's it? yeah. ♪ everybody two seconds! ♪ "dear sebastian, after careful consideration of your application, it is with great pleasure that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. ♪ jl judd. >> dickerson: amy walter is the national editor at the "cook political report." jeffrey goldberg is the editor in chief of "the atlantic." we're also joined by "slate"
magazine chief political correspondent jamelle bouie and ben dove niche. before we get to policy, ben, i want to ask you question about senator mccain who is your father in law. how is he doing? >> well, john, i'm happy to say that he's doing well. the truth is that as anyone knows whose family has battled cancer or any, oftentimes there are side effects that you have. senator has been through round of chemo he was hospitalized this week at walter reed. our thanks to the doctors at nih and walter reed who have been treating him, he's doing well, in good spirits, he's looking forward to heading back home to arizona for the holidays, our thanks to everyone who has been sending thoughts and prayers to the sector this week. we greatly appreciate it. he remains one of the toughest men on the face of the earth as you know. >> dickerson: that we know. send them again, our prayers to him and family. thank you. all right, so now to this week
let's start with the tax bill, jeffrey is going to pass, get funded by the president unless something really crazy happens. >> which is not impossible in this america. >> dickerson: right. >> you're right, probably pass. dickerson: so, give us your sense of that, what that means? >> i think broadest political sense, i think that this takes donald trump's pretty bad year and might move it into the not bad category in the following sense. he started his term, first year with a supreme court victory, might end with a tax cut victory, a tax plan victory. it's a legislative victory might not be possible with a broad swath of americans, but it counts as a victory. isis, by the way is on its back foot in iraq and syria. if we didn't have all of the noise and craziness, russia investigation, early morning tweeting, all of the race-baiting everything else that is going on you would look
at this year and say, you know what, not the worst year for a first-year president. it's very interesting to think about it in those terms. >> especially on the economy. which is the economy is doing very swell, people are feeling better about it. the secretary and treasury came on talked about people's 401(k) improving, all that have is true, yet none that have is translating the way it normally translates to a president. which is the economy is doing well, usually the party in power, their approval ratings do well. so, figuring out where that all stands as jeffrey pointed out is really about the fact that a voters going to focus on the economy that they feel is doing better, they personally are doing better or focusing on the things about the president, his temperament, his behavior that they don't like. right now they are focusing politically much more on what they don't like about president than what they do like about the economy. >> dickerson: it is to watch the president talking about the health. stock market.
jamelle, the polling for this tax bill is not good. senator mcconnell's argument going to get wet once people start feeling that tax cut, do you buy that argument? >> time not sure that i do. reminds me quite a bit of the democratic party's argument, once voters understood the benefits they got they would like the bill. and as it turned out it took a good three or four or five years for the public was ever positive about that law, and they largely became positive about that law because of the prospect of losing that law and losing the medicaid expansion. although republican tax bill does deliver some benefit, it doesn't deliver anything as concrete as something like medicaid expansion did that might create the problem with voters. if you look at polling so far, even suburban voters, people would support this kind of tax policy are skeptical. i'm not sure, i appreciate
senator mcconnell's optimism but i'm not sure it will play out. >> dickerson: ben, your thoughts generally and also playing off of what jamelle was saying, senator sanders said that basically his message is, corporate taxes are going up if democrats get in control. how much do you think that plays in this context? >> i think republicans are going to be very confident running on this measure as sort of their key signature legislative success in 20128. i think that you will see pick up in terms of people's attitude towards it once they you will actually see paychecks go up. one of the things about this in terms of how unpopular it is that when you simply get past initial numbers it's the people think that they're not going to benefit from it. that they're not going to see benefit that their taxes are going up not down. when people see think pair checks with more money they will have more positive attitude. but the simple fact is that republicans want to be talking about this, democrats are going foe be talking about getting rid of this president and unpopular policies. going to be so many different
democrats and frankly base forces who are pushing democrats towards turning this into annie miami beachment election where they will get this president out of office. i think it's going to be difficult because democratic leadership would much prefer to be talking about, look what he just gave to corporations and things along those lines. nancy pelosi's lines about this being apocalyptic end of the world, tax scenario are something that would actually cater to what they would like to be talking about instead the base of the democratic party is going to drive this into a much more significant and extremes direction. >> it seems that the republicans have hard lift here. it is impossible to not to say that the greatest beneficiary in this plan, corporations. if you believe corporations are people then people are benefitting. if you don't the democrats have a very potent weapon. it will take -- if it takes -- it will take time to get people around to this but i don't know if you can ever get around to this, that is the top line observation. >> to amy's point from earlier,
all of this interacting in an environment where voters are quite angry at the president's behavior, even if there are material benefits in the tax bill there's no -- there's no guarantee that will interact with voter attitudes in way to produce political benefit for the republican party. >> dickerson: what about democrats seizing this moment, ability, they haven't been able to stop it through congress, but as a political matter to ben's point, this used to be bread and butter of the democratic party, how to talk to working people. they got some ammunition they can use here, what is your assessment on their ability to ultimately use it to make a case to people who already they have talked to about income and equality overall these years. >> that's something that democrats have going that they're not in the white house. they are the party of the opposition, it's so much easier to be the party of the opposition than to be the party actually making policy. and what we found especially in these mid-term or early mid-term elections and special elections
is that what the party has struggled with for the last eight years in the era of obama was getting their base, that obama electorate excited and energized. voters of color and younger voters, they couldn't do it when obama was in the white house, you know what is turning out obama coalition, drum system a great motivator. and toe the point about whether they can talk about these issues, i think they make a vers over and over again the point you made about, thousands of lobbyists worked on this bill, tax cuts for corporate america, whether people are feeling it or not, i think becomes less important than the overall argument that this president and republicans said they were going to help the working people, this is really the same old, same old helping corporations. again, the issue was, do i feel that my paycheck, biggest group of people that are souring on the president living insure
urban america they're 401(k), r doing great. if it was just about the economy they would be on board. >> biggest question heading into 2018 i think is whether there's a learning curve in the white house. if he comes out of this realizing, wait, i got an actual traditional republican victory learns to get out of his own way in 2018, then he's doing pretty well heading into the mid terms. but this is donald trump we're talking about there's no guarantee that there's a learning curve. that he'll return to form, even with proof that behaving in traditional way actually has benefit. >> you saw that in alabama in the sense that you have to amy's point, a candidate in doug jones who is more than 90% of what hillary clinton achieved in alabama and candidate. got less than 50% of what donald trump achieved. the truth is that trump since he got into the white house effectively been offering his voters circuses without the bread. giving them the same level of entertainment that they
experienced during the 2016 election without actually delivering on a lot of his populous promises when it came to shifting the way that the republican party would prioritize things. you see that totally with this tax bill. that is a very traditional republican approach, it's not a break away from the kind of approach that you might have seen under a president jeb bush. that is something that satisfies mitch mcconnell and republican donors but not the same voters who said that donald trump was the kind of shift they wanted to see in the g.o.p. >> what's interesting that in alabama the voters who turned out for roy moore are the voters who are this working class, populous space. they turn out for roy moore. the the ones that didn't are suburban voters they support completely collapsed. there is interesting question here of, to a degree to which the material circumstances of these white suburban voters in alabama and virginia will see for us next year seems to not matter as much for their
political choices, they're angry at donald trump for reasons don't have anything to do with how they're doing in the pocketbook. >> right. so, amy, could we have a basically a policy-free 2018 which would be disaster because for democrats they want to drive down the suburban numbers, remind everybody of the most outrageous thing the president did, the base of the democratic party gets energized as you already argued. don't they want to keep the focus entirely on donald trump? >> they can make it on donald trump but really they don't have to talk to their base and remind them why they don't like donald trump. the base is pretty clear how they feel about him. but it's making the case that the policies that the administration, that republicans in congress have passed have been out of step with you -- however they want to address it whether it's the focus on corporate tax cuts, whether it's on the administration and the changes that have been made on
issues like the environment, labor standards, et cetera. you can go down the list, it's been -- conservatives should be happy. they got a great agenda through conservative judges getting through, regulatory reform, rolling back a lot of obama-era -- >> nothing talking about this because of the circuses but they are moving their 'general d. >> one thing i do also want to say that the focus so much for the president, we saw story today that president will do more of these alleys. in 2016 -- in 2018. the l whiching for him is not getting those people natural lesion to vote for him. the challenge is to get the people who never showed up in the the rallies but ultimately voted for him to continue to vote for him. those people who were reluctant trump voters, didn't like him in 2016 but disliked hillary clinton more, they thought he was the change candidate she was status quo. those are the folks that are sour. and souring on the president. the number of rallies he does and keeping that business
energized isn't the challenge. the challenge to jeffrey's point is going back to those people who were reluctant trump supporters. but who want to see progress made without all the other drama. >> dickerson: people said were souring in alabama. ben, republican i talked to in assessing alabama said, we don't think we'll have anybody who is been credibly accused of sexual assault on a childish any other republican race. so, in other words, let's not over read alabama. that makes sense to me. >> it does make sense to me, too, john. but i think honestly republicans in the senate were breathing sigh of relief after alabama they did not want to be dealing with roy moore, particularly the certain that lot of different staffers shared who were expressing was, once he gets in here, will we ever be aible g to get rid of him. they didn't feel like they couli think is one that deserves a little bit more attention than just, we're not going to nominate someone like that in
another race. because there's series of decisions that were made by a number of different republican politicians along the way that led to roy moore. mitch mccome has been of the belief for long time now that there are two kinds of politicians, there are politicians he likes and there are politicians who will lose. this ignores the third kind which is politicians he doesn't like who could win. fact is that if mcconnell had not parachuted in millions of dollars to new -- conservative in the primary that he very well could have been the nominee in this situation and might be a senator today. now he has his own health issues, of course, but i think this is one of those things where mcconnell needs to look hard at sort of challenges that are going -- be at the fore in these primaries where he may need to make a choice about do i have a winnable candidate who is conservative or do i have someone who county. >> dickerson: we'll have tonight it there. we'll be right backish a moment.
politics takes awhile to catch up but change is taking place there, too. roy moore lost in alabama and there have been other ripples, change will continue, so far there are 374 women potentially running for the house in next year's election. 305 are democrats. 69 republican. so far there are 42 women exploring a senate run, 28 democrats and 14 republicans. according to the rutgers university center for american women and politics. that's four times as many women challenging house incumbents this time compared to the same period in 2015. and ten times the number of women challenging incumbent senators compared to 2012 and 2014. we're just under 11 months from election day. the door is closing on the era that protected powerful men in washington. and based on these numbers it appears another door is opening.
we'll be right back. ♪ video-game dance music [burke] abstract accident. seen it. covered it. we know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two. ♪ we are farmers. bum-pa-dum, bum-bum-bum-bum ♪ but when we brought our daughter home, that was it. now i have nicoderm cq. the nicoderm cq patch with unique extended release technology helps prevent your urge to smoke all day. it's the best thing that ever happened to me. every great why needs a great how.
>> announcer: the following is a paid presentation for volaire, brought to you by junee brands. >> people ask me all the time, what's my secret for beautiful hair -- hair that just moves with natural, gorgeous, weightless volume. my secret? one word -- volaire. >> look how much hair i have. it feels like i have so much more hair than i really do. i love it! >> it feels like there's an air machine literally lifting my hair. >> i've never seen my hair go from zero to 60 in one go. i'm never using anything except volaire. >> announcer: introducing volaire, the easiest three-step airweight hair-volumizing system, developed for every woman to achieve healthy-looking, beautiful hair with natural shine and weightless volume in just one use. simply shampoo, condition, and style. >> i used to spend over an hour on my hair, and it would fall flat not even halfway through the day. volaire, it's 15 minutes, i'm good to go, and it lasts a